Tag Archives: Supreme Court

Oral Argument in Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis: Class Action Waivers in Employment Agreements

The Supreme Court began its new Term yesterday with oral arguments in cases involving whether arbitration agreements permitting only individual (non-class) arbitrations are enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act, or prohibited by the National Labor Relations Act as an improper restriction on collective action. It is a case that essentially pits one federal statute against … Continue Reading

Scope of Personal Jurisdiction In Nationwide and Multistate Class Actions Potentially Impacted By Supreme Court Decision In Bristol-Myers Squibb Case

This week the Supreme Court issued a new opinion in a case that involved the scope of personal jurisdiction in a nationwide mass action brought in a state court. Although it is not entirely clear the extent to which this decision may apply in a class action or in a case brought in federal court, … Continue Reading

Gorsuch on Class Actions: How Might He Compare to Scalia?

Justice Scalia made major contributions to class action law,  writing the Supreme Court’s opinions in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes and Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, two of the Court’s most significant class action decisions in this decade.  Following President Trump’s nomination of Tenth Circuit Judge Neil M. Gorsuch to replace Justice Scalia, although it may … Continue Reading

Supreme Court to Hear Class Action Cases Involving Class Action Waivers and Tolling of Statutes of Limitations

The U.S. Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in class action cases involving: (1) class action waivers in employment contracts; and (2) whether filing of a securities class action tolled a statute of repose. In both cases the questions presented are relatively narrow, but opinions issued by the Supreme Court potentially could have broader implications for … Continue Reading

Spokeo v. Robins Supreme Court Opinion: What Is Concrete Harm?

Today the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, addressing whether the plaintiff had standing to sue in a putative class action brought under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”). Like some other opinions we have seen from the eight-member Court following Justice Scalia’s death, this decision is relatively narrow in … Continue Reading

Tyson Foods Supreme Court Opinion Addresses Statistical Evidence in Class Actions

Today, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Tyson Foods v. Bouaphakeo, addressing the use of statistical evidence in class actions. The plaintiffs’ bar will undoubtedly claim the decision as a victory because class certification was upheld. But I don’t think that’s right. The decision (a  6-2 opinion by Justice Kennedy, with Justices Thomas and … Continue Reading

How Will Justice Scalia’s Death Impact Pending Class Action Cases?

As our nation and especially the legal community mourn the death of one of the most charismatic and influential Supreme Court justices in our history, one question that might be asked is how Justice Scalia’s death might impact pending class action cases. There are two pending class action cases of broad significance: Spokeo, Inc. v. … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Opinion In Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez: Kicking The Can Down The Road

Today the U.S. Supreme Court decided Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, No. 14-857. The question presented was whether an unaccepted offer of full relief on the named plaintiff’s individual claim will render a putative class action moot. The answer is “no,” according to a 5-3 opinion by Justice Ginsburg (with a separate concurrence by Justice Thomas). … Continue Reading

Thoughts on Supreme Court Oral Argument in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins

Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339 (SCOTUSBlog page). The question presented is “Whether Congress may confer Article III standing upon a plaintiff who suffers no concrete harm, and who therefore could not otherwise invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court, by authorizing a private right of action … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Oral Argument in Dart Cherokee Basin v. Owens

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument this week in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. v. Owens, No. 13-719 (SCOTUSblog page) (transcript). This case involves whether a defendant must provide evidence with its notice of removal under the Class Action Fairness Act to support the amount in controversy. I wrote about this case after certiorari … Continue Reading

Supreme Court To Decide Whether Evidence Must Be Submitted With Notice of Removal: Dart Cherokee Basin v. Owens

Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, No. 13-719 (docket).  The question presented is: Whether a defendant seeking removal to federal court is required to include evidence supporting federal jurisdiction in the notice of removal, or is alleging the required “short and plain statement … Continue Reading

Mississippi ex. rel. Hood v. AU Optronics Corp.: Supreme Court Decides What Constitutes a “Mass Action” Under the Class Action Fairness Act

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its second decision construing the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”) in Mississippi ex. rel. Hood v. AU Optronics Corp., No. 12-1036 (slip opinion).  In a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Sotomayor (for whom I was a law student intern years ago when she was on the Second … Continue Reading

Mississippi v. AU Optronics Corp.: Oral Argument in U.S. Supreme Court

The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard oral argument in its second case involving the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”), which is Mississippi ex. rel. Hood v. AU Optronics Corp., No. 12-1036 (see oral argument transcript; SCOTUSblog page).  The question presented is “Whether a state’s parens patriae action is removable as a ‘mass action’ under the … Continue Reading

American Express v. Italian Colors Restaurant Supreme Court Decision: Potential Insurance Industry Impact

The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued its opinion in American Express Company v. Italian Colors Restaurant, No. 12-133, addressing whether an arbitration clause prohibiting class-action arbitrations is enforceable when the cost of arbitrating a federal statutory claim on an individual basis exceeds the potential recovery.  The Court held, 5-3, that such prohibitions on class arbitrations … Continue Reading

Oxford Health Plans v. Sutter: Supreme Court Largely Sidesteps Class Arbitration Issues

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter, No. 12-135, addressing whether an arbitrator exceeded his powers in deciding that a contract provided for class arbitration (i.e., a class action arbitration proceeding).  The Court held that the arbitrator did not exceed his powers in making that ruling, although … Continue Reading

Supreme Court To Decide Whether State Attorney General’s Parens Patriae Action Is A “Mass Action” Under the Class Action Fairness Act

Next Term, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether, or under what circumstances, a lawsuit brought by a state attorney general as a parens patriae action is removable as a “mass action” under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA).  This week the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Mississippi ex rel. Hood v. AU Optronics Corp., … Continue Reading

Supreme Court’s Vacate Orders Suggest Breadth of New Comcast v. Behrend Opinion

On April 1, the Supreme Court issued “GVR” (grant, vacate and remand) orders in two cases, summarily instructing the courts of appeals to reconsider their prior decisions in light of the Court’s recent Comcast Corp. v. Behrend decision.   The opinions that were vacated and remanded were Ross v. RBS Citizens, NA, 667 F.3d 900 (7th … Continue Reading

Comcast v. Behrend Supreme Court Opinion: Raising The Bar for Plaintiffs in Class Actions

Today the U.S. Supreme Court decided Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, No. 11-864 (slip opinion), which presented the question of whether a class action can be certified in federal court without admissible evidence that damages are susceptible to proof on a class-wide basis.  The Court’s answer was that, under Rule 23(b)(3)’s predominance requirement, the plaintiffs had … Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Standard Fire Insurance Company v. Knowles — Class Action Fairness Act Case

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in The Standard Fire Insurance Company v. Knowles, No. 11-1450 (slip opinion), which involves the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA).  In a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Breyer, the Court overturned the district court’s decision remanding a putative class action to state court.  The Court … Continue Reading
LexBlog